On Sky the other day they were referring to player's form going by this and last aeason's clay court form. Going on win percentages of their matches played.in total they said Murray was top followed closely by Nadal and the Djokovic. I dont know if anyone here can validate that statement.

Both Andy and Novak have lost twice in the last two years. Andy has played more matches so his win % is definitely higher than Novak.

Rafa has lost 7 matches I think. Given that, I struggle to see how he could have a higher win % than Novak. He would need to have 3.5 times the number of wins to match him and whilst he has more matches I would be surprised if it was that many more!

Looked into this properly. Records are:

Murray (27-3) : 90%Novak (25-3) : 89.3%Rafa (45-10) : 81.8%

Shows how daft stats can be. Rafa's 45 wins, includes just one against either Nole or Andy

And Andy's not ahead of Novak. We all agree Novak is the favourite

But it does indicate, that it's tighter than some would have us believe

Also, I don't really see the value of looking at Rafa's 2015 form...he fell off a cliff last year, everyone knows that - especially Novak.2016 Nadal is a completely different beast and you can see him visibly getting better by the tournament, rendering stats somewhat moot. A guy who has won 14 GS knows how to pace & peak...however, he's lost some speed and mental edge...hence I have him at 25% chance.

Another interesting question is - if Djokovic gets knocked out early say, then who is fave, Murray or Rafa?

lydian wrote:But there is no way Murray is fave based on that surely...

Also, I don't really see the value of looking at Rafa's 2015 form...he fell off a cliff last year, everyone knows that - especially Novak.2016 Nadal is a completely different beast and you can see him visibly getting better by the tournament, rendering stats somewhat moot. A guy who has won 14 GS knows how to pace & peak...however, he's lost some speed and mental edge...hence I have him at 25% chance.

Another interesting question is - if Djokovic gets knocked out early say, then who is fave, Murray or Rafa?

Nobody is saying Murray is the fave more saying the myth is now dead that he can't play on clay.

There is no disputing Rafa is in far better nick than he was last year at this stage. As to if Djoko gets knocked out early then it would then depend on at what stage that happened and what form Andy and Rafa have displayed up to that time at RG as for me at the mo it is too close to call. On past history you'd say no contest - Rafa favourite to win the tournament regardless of whether Novak was in or out. On recent history where Rafa has been off song but improved a heck of a lot on clay in recent weeks and where Andy has continued to prove he can win Masters titles on clay and has seemingly bolstered his serve then it is too tough to call.

lydian wrote:But there is no way Murray is fave based on that surely...

Also, I don't really see the value of looking at Rafa's 2015 form...he fell off a cliff last year, everyone knows that - especially Novak.2016 Nadal is a completely different beast and you can see him visibly getting better by the tournament, rendering stats somewhat moot. A guy who has won 14 GS knows how to pace & peak...however, he's lost some speed and mental edge...hence I have him at 25% chance.

Another interesting question is - if Djokovic gets knocked out early say, then who is fave, Murray or Rafa?

It just narrows the odds for all. Djoko is the favourite

I actually think that Andy would beat Rafa if they met, but would admit that some of the old Rafa might resurface in such a match

CaledonianCraig wrote:Nobody is saying Murray is the fave more saying the myth is now dead that he can't play on clay.

There is no disputing Rafa is in far better nick than he was last year at this stage. As to if Djoko gets knocked out early then it would then depend on at what stage that happened and what form Andy and Rafa have displayed up to that time at RG as for me at the mo it is too close to call. On past history you'd say no contest - Rafa favourite to win the tournament regardless of whether Novak was in or out. On recent history where Rafa has been off song but improved a heck of a lot on clay in recent weeks and where Andy has continued to prove he can win Masters titles on clay and has seemingly bolstered his serve then it is too tough to call.

If Rafa meets Murray at the FO, I'll give the edge to Rafa. Rafa seems to be getting back to form, not forgetting he did beat Murray at MC this year despite Murray playing well. MC surface is closer to RG than Madrid is.

Remember in 2014 where they met at Rome and Murray played the way he did like MC this year but Rafa managed to win in three sets. Come FO that year, Rafa gave Murray a beat down in straight sets.

Rafa knows how to win at RG and when he's in good form he'll be hard to beat. In fact Rafa has better results this year on European clay prior to the FO compared to 2014 - he reached QF at MC and Barcy, won Madrid and reached final at Rome in 2014. He won MC+Barcy, reach SF at Madrid and QF at Rome this year. He lost to top 2 players this year, in 2014 he lost to Ferrer and Almagro in addition to Djokovic.

Fair points BLB...What makes this RG so good in prospect is the variability of who could do well and whats on the line..."La Decima" for Rafa, the final jigaw piece for Novak, and breakout slam win for Andy. Looking forward to this one for sure...and all eyes on a) the draw to see where guys like Kyrgios, Goffin, Zverev, etc end up, and b) the skies to see if its hot/dry or cool/damp.

lydian wrote:Fair points BLB...What makes this RG so good in prospect is the variability of who could do well and whats on the line..."La Decima" for Rafa, the final jigaw piece for Novak, and breakout slam win for Andy. Looking forward to this one for sure...and all eyes on a) the draw to see where guys like Kyrgios, Goffin, Zverev, etc end up, and b) the skies to see if its hot/dry or cool/damp.

Well the first week is to start cool and damp for the first two or three days.

"I am going to support IMBL in saying that 73% is within the bounds of probability based on an assessment of the past few years of stats.

Lets maximise the stats:Has won four of the last five grand slams: 80%Has won five of the last seven grand slams: 71%"

You have made some great arguments in this thread, but one I would quibble with is the extent to which the above two stats indicate win probability:

1 Regression to the mean - to explain simply, he has won 3 out of 3 of the last slams - 100%. Clearly, that does not indicate a win probability of 100% here, just like his win probability here would not be 0% had he won 0 out of 3. Extreme win probabilities one way or the other in recent times therefore indicate a more moderate number. To put it another way, his form cannot last forever.

2 Your stats are essentially using his wins at 3 other slams to predict a higher probability at this event. What about his record of zero from the last 10 French Opens? Isn't that a factor?

Nore Staat wrote:I am going to support IMBL in saying that 73% is within the bounds of probability based on an assessment of the past few years of stats.

Lets maximise the stats:Has won four of the last five grand slams: 80%Has won five of the last seven grand slams: 71%

You have made some great arguments in this thread, but one I would quibble with is the extent to which the above two stats indicate win probability:

1 Regression to the mean - to explain simply, he has won 3 out of 3 of the last slams - 100%. Clearly, that does not indicate a win probability of 100% here, just like his win probability here would not be 0% had he won 0 out of 3. Extreme win probabilities one way or the other in recent times therefore indicate a more moderate number. To put it another way, his form cannot last forever.

2 Your stats are essentially using his wins at 3 other slams to predict a higher probability at this event. What about his record of zero from the last 10 French Opens? Isn't that a factor?

I agree certainly on the last point and said it myself. We are talking a clay slam here which Novak has never won so using slams on a different surface don't hold much water.

History also tells us we should be careful about giving players 70-80% win probabilities, there are just too many factors and other players.

As far as I know, 2009 was the peak of Rafa's dominance and the year the bookies gave him 70-80% his highest ever win odds for French Open as I recall after he crushed the clay season in 2008 and was crushing the rest of the tour on every surface by early to mid 2009. He had Federer his biggest rival getting 4 games against him the year before and reduced to tears by what was becoming a one sided rivalry, Djokovic and Murray were barely a factor at the FO, there were no clay greats around, and yet...that result was an unbelievable shock.

Likewise Sampras losing in the middle of his Wimbledon winning run.

And these were people dominating the event, not someone that had never been able to win it.

I still think Djokovic is overdue a loss in the first week at some stage. I mean, Simon wasn't too far away.

Has anyone watched much of Wawrinka on clay this year?Although there doesn't appear to be much evidence that he will put a run together this year, there is evidence that he can do it.It's well known that Stan put in the performance of 2015 in the final against Novak, what's talked about less is that he played at that level throughout the entire tournament. The Djokovic match was no Rosol-esque case.

theslosty wrote:Has anyone watched much of Wawrinka on clay this year?Although there doesn't appear to be much evidence that he will put a run together this year, there is evidence that he can do it.It's well known that Stan put in the performance of 2015 in the final against Novak, what's talked about less is that he played at that level throughout the entire tournament. The Djokovic match was no Rosol-esque case.

I think Wawrinka likes the clay and slower courts for his battles against Djokovic. Oddly, he might enjoy an edge over Djokovic on the slower surfaces because Stan needs more time on the return and more time with his big spin generating swings for the time that clay provides. He still has the power to hit through the surface and likes to hit the ball later anyway. On quicker surfaces where Novak's earlier ball striking is favored Stan has struggled. Honestly, its still the matchup I fear the most as a Novak fan. Simply because he can do what basically no one else can do right now to Novak on that surface is take the racquet out of his hands. The last 5 slam matches against the two have been really close with Novak going 3-2. Stan knows he is a tough match for Novak so that gives him even more confidence to commit to those shots.

Last year's results and career results will have little bearing on the next couple of weeks (with the possible exception of any mental baggage they may have given a player).

Murray is the player currently in the best form, which means he has a very realistic chance at winning.

That is what I love, keep busy rabbit's footing Murdock. Look out Murray fans now that Murdock likes Murray's chances he could get struck by lightening disembarking his plane at Charles De Gaulle. Now say some nice things about Wawrinka's chances and Nadal to.

But I am most upset by the idea that you won't be making a pick this year. Come on Murdock what if Becker decided not to coach, or Novak not to play, as a valuable member of Team Djokovic you must continue rabbit's footing until the job is done in Paris.

theslosty wrote:Has anyone watched much of Wawrinka on clay this year?Although there doesn't appear to be much evidence that he will put a run together this year, there is evidence that he can do it.It's well known that Stan put in the performance of 2015 in the final against Novak, what's talked about less is that he played at that level throughout the entire tournament. The Djokovic match was no Rosol-esque case.

I think Wawrinka likes the clay and slower courts for his battles against Djokovic. Oddly, he might enjoy an edge over Djokovic on the slower surfaces because Stan needs more time on the return and more time with his big spin generating swings for the time that clay provides. He still has the power to hit through the surface and likes to hit the ball later anyway. On quicker surfaces where Novak's earlier ball striking is favored Stan has struggled. Honestly, its still the matchup I fear the most as a Novak fan. Simply because he can do what basically no one else can do right now to Novak on that surface is take the racquet out of his hands. The last 5 slam matches against the two have been really close with Novak going 3-2. Stan knows he is a tough match for Novak so that gives him even more confidence to commit to those shots.

I had almost the exact same thoughts.Stan is the only player who can can currently take the match out of Djokovic's hands.Stan's game is suited to the RG surface.Stan has more raw power than almost anyone else on tour.

If he is playing well enough to get the chance to meet Djokovic he will cause him problems for sure.

socal1976 wrote:But I am most upset by the idea that you won't be making a pick this year. Come on Murdock what if Becker decided not to coach, or Novak not to play, as a valuable member of Team Djokovic you must continue rabbit's footing until the job is done in Paris.

If I attempt a cheeky reverse-jinx, the universe will only dish out a harsher punishment.

I think it might be like those awful Wishmaster films where my prediction will come true but in a really macabre way.

Good post Slotsy, I fully agree. It will be a close match if they get the chance to meet. But Stan needs to up his level to make it to the working end of the slam where his big match pedigree against Novak matters. That has been a challenge for him in the 12 months post his FO title.

socal1976 wrote:But I am most upset by the idea that you won't be making a pick this year. Come on Murdock what if Becker decided not to coach, or Novak not to play, as a valuable member of Team Djokovic you must continue rabbit's footing until the job is done in Paris.

If I attempt a cheeky reverse-jinx, the universe will only dish out a harsher punishment.

I think it might be like those awful Wishmaster films where my prediction will come true but in a really macabre way.

I know Murdock, you know best how to harness your own savant like abilities to sway fate. I understand its not an exact science, you are kind of like the Oracle at Delphi in reverse for tennis picks.

theslosty wrote:Has anyone watched much of Wawrinka on clay this year?Although there doesn't appear to be much evidence that he will put a run together this year, there is evidence that he can do it.It's well known that Stan put in the performance of 2015 in the final against Novak, what's talked about less is that he played at that level throughout the entire tournament. The Djokovic match was no Rosol-esque case.

I think Wawrinka likes the clay and slower courts for his battles against Djokovic. Oddly, he might enjoy an edge over Djokovic on the slower surfaces because Stan needs more time on the return and more time with his big spin generating swings for the time that clay provides. He still has the power to hit through the surface and likes to hit the ball later anyway. On quicker surfaces where Novak's earlier ball striking is favored Stan has struggled. Honestly, its still the matchup I fear the most as a Novak fan. Simply because he can do what basically no one else can do right now to Novak on that surface is take the racquet out of his hands. The last 5 slam matches against the two have been really close with Novak going 3-2. Stan knows he is a tough match for Novak so that gives him even more confidence to commit to those shots.

I had almost the exact same thoughts.Stan is the only player who can can currently take the match out of Djokovic's hands.Stan's game is suited to the RG surface.Stan has more raw power than almost anyone else on tour.

If he is playing well enough to get the chance to meet Djokovic he will cause him problems for sure.

I'm really hoping, for interest purposes, Krygios is in Novak's draw (but based on prior slams it's pretty much guaranteed he will be in Andy's!)

I think Kyrgios will be a big banana skin not only for Novak but for everyone but at wimbeldon. So save this post BS, and it will be extremely relevant in three or four weeks. No one wants Nick in their draw at Wimby, he hits aces with like half swings.

To Henman Bill - you can't criticise my comment by ignoring two thirds of it and ignoring the condition I used. The condition I used was to "maximise the stats". I could have minimised the stats but that wasn't the purpose of the comment. I clearly specified the context of the comment. I did the same with regard Roland Garros - but you ignored it and criticised me without reference to what I had written.

For sure...all his strokes are very abbreviated which should make him great on quicker surfaces. In many respects although it not pretty to watch (vs Fed's grace) it is highly effective and the prototype for future players. I suspect he can even do damage at RG if he's on a roll and its hot/dry.

I think Stan's star has peaked...he doesn't seem to have the same intensity like before - where has Stan gone this year? But who knows, for sure he can hit through Novak and has shown that many times now. He's a bit like Soderling tbh (albeit SHBH vs DHBH).

People talk about Nick's Fh and serve and of course those will translate well on the grass. And like you say Lydian he has such abbreviated strokes especially on the BH that this will cause a lot of problems. The BH will be a killer at Wimbeldon for Nick. If Nick serves well and is going up the line shot consistently he could win the whole thing. There is no take back on the backhand, kind of like the double handed version of the McEnroe BH. Mac had no backswing on his BH yet he could really flatten it out or cut the ball and it was impossible to read. The Kyrgios BH can't be read, it has no shape and bounce it just stays low especially on grass. Its a very devious and quirky shot. I hate those type of shots to play against. It makes you power less, by the time you react the ball is already through the court. Its not like you can just adjust to the pace or spin or slice, you literally just can't react to the ball because of lack of time.

It is said that Federer uses the tactic of hitting the ball early, which gives the opponent less time to respond. Does Kyrgios take the ball early? From Socal's comment it seems that Kyrgios is not necessarily taking the ball early - he is just making his shot more difficult to read because of his short back swing. So the opponent needs more time to work out when the ball has been hit and where the ball is going - so the opponent has less effective time to respond.

Henman Bill wrote:Also, your maths is wrong, you need to multiply the % not add them so that they compound and so your calculated chance of winning should be 75% rather than 73%. Doesn't make much difference here, so maybe a bit pedantic, but worth keeping in mind.

Yes you're right, I was in a rush and without a calculator so did it that way to get to an estimate.

I think your calculation assumes the worst for Djokovic on his opponents, someone may make a surprise run, and would be an easier opponent; see "Other" in my calculation. If you factor that in it would actually make his chances slightly better.

But if you include 'other', you have to take into account weighted average, so you can't just take an average of those 4 figures; e.g. the chance of 'other' in a Grand Slam final is not equivalent to the chance of Murray or Nadal.

Anyway enough of boring stats, in the next post I'll go through where we disagree i.e. the percentages of individual match ups.

Henman Bill wrote:Every single one of your % is too low. Nadal 10% - maybe 30% - it's the 9 time champion vs the 0 time champion.Murray - 20% maybe 30% now because he just beat him on clay.Nishikori - has beat Djokovic in a slam and looked like some good results on clay this year, so 3% is too lowStan - 5% is too low - he has a great slam record against Djokovic, beat him last year2% before the QF is also too low, I'd have that at more like 8% (more like 2% per match) - take the long view here, just because in recent years Djokovic hasn't early exited for a long time - sooner or later it happens, Federer had his Stakhovsky moment, Nadal his Rosol and so on. 2% per match because there's probably 0.5% or 1% chance of just an injury or some major personal issue or illness effecting. 2% would also include a portion for the chance that he may have to pull out of a match due to injury or illness or personal issue before starting.

You say 8% of Djokovic losing before the QF! The most dangerous player before the QF he could face on this surface according to the bookies is Thiem. And I doubt Thiem would get a set, forget 2 sets or even 3. Unless Djokovic is injured I don't see how he can lose before the QF.

Nadal- I put him at 10% and you put him at 30%. I think we have to be cautious here and remember this isn't the Nadal of old. Even prime Nadal had to play sensationally to match Djokovic, now with Nadal declined it's a tough task. He doesn't even have a good serve Rafa, so his 'decline' is exposed in every point. He's won 0 sets in the last 7 matches, including in straights last year. Giving Nadal 30% chance is close to saying every 3 times they play, Nadal wins once. That's very optimistic for Nadal. I think 10% is much more realistic.

Nishikori- I think 10% is very generous. Nishikori won a set against Djokovic in Rome because Djokovic injured his own ankle which hurt him for that first set. Nishi got routined by Djokovic easily in the Australian Open earlier this year. Nishi is in worse form in fact than pervious years, I've watched him play and he's been so inconsistent. I think if they play 20 times, Nishi might win once, so you're 10% chance is generous.

You say Murray- 30%; I say 20%. Hmm. On this one I can see where you're coming from, Murray's game is not that much inferior to Djokovic and the gap in mental strength may be closed if Djokovic is feeling the nerves. But don't let Rome trick you, the recent record between the two is ridiculously one sided- in Slams and outside Slams. In Rome I do think Djokovic was tired, he was feeling effects of the tight Nadal and Nishi matches consecutively. I think given he has a day's rest at FO; Djokovic would need to have two very tiring matches in both QF and SF before the final against Murray- only then would I think Murray has above 1/3 chance. But it is close, and I would not be shocked if Murray beat Djokovic in the final.

socal1976 wrote:I think Kyrgios will be a big banana skin not only for Novak but for everyone but at wimbeldon. So save this post BS, and it will be extremely relevant in three or four weeks. No one wants Nick in their draw at Wimby, he hits aces with like half swings.

Oh, I agree. He's a danger man for RG but not a contender in my view. However, he's one of the favourites for Wimbledon.

Hi IMBL, I have a few comments although I think if we're not careful we'll end up either overanalyzing or going around in circles so will try and keep it short. I could agree that Rafa might win only 10-20% of the time against Novak on all surfaces, but at a slam, where Rafa holds the mental edge, it's slow clay. These are factors. I'd give Rafa a higher % here.

For the early rounds. I'm saying Djokovic has a 1 in 50 chance of not progressing in each of the first few matches, you're saying it's 1 in 200.

Actually bookies odds for the match will be lower than this because of odds of player pulling out with injury before match are not included, but on the other hand higher to account for profit margin. Let's say those factors cancel out.

So if I am a bookie, I am giving average odds of 50-1 for Djokovic's first four opponents, you are giving 200-1. Let's try and remember to have a look next week and see who the bookies agree with.

I did think of the weighted average but figured it wouldn't make much difference and I really do think "other" is as likely a final opponent as Murray or Nadal, especially when we factor in that Nadal could fall in his own half.

But as you mention it's getting to be almost more of a debate as to who knows more maths (rather than tennis).

Some talk about Warwinka. I thought I'd post about this form this year, some stats:

His clay losses recently were Monica (ranked 114), Kyrgios (21), Nadal (5). Prior to the clay he lost to Kuznetsov (51) and Goffin (18) on the US hardcourts.

The only top 20 players he's beaten this season are Simon (18) and Paire (19) and he also lost to Paire this season.

Yes, he won 2 titles, Dubai and Chennai, but not by beating top players.

*Rankings are at the time of the match, not current.

I don't think I've seen him play since the Australian Open to be honest but based on those results I wouldn't be too surprised if he bombs in the first week. But, I also wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't drop a set until R4 and then takes Djoko to 5 again. So, a bit of a wildcard this year.

Federer, if he is injured, has no chance, and should probably pull out. However, if he were to be fully fit, it's not like he's forgotten how to play tennis and he could play himself into form, and then play a blinder against Djokovic in the SF again, would be just Novak's FO luck. I think due to the matchup it will be a little boost to Djokovic to see Federer pull out or be in the other half of the draw.

If you google the latest news, it's reported that Roger hasn't decided yet and wants to practice. I imagine we'll hear tonight or tomorrow the decision which I expect he will respectfully make in time for the draw.

Don't think its worth it. Say he does struggle through to the semis. Loses a long one with novak, as is very likely, and his fragile body is then totally crocked for the few tournies he has a realistically decent chance at

lydian wrote:But there is no way Murray is fave based on that surely...

Also, I don't really see the value of looking at Rafa's 2015 form...he fell off a cliff last year, everyone knows that - especially Novak.2016 Nadal is a completely different beast and you can see him visibly getting better by the tournament, rendering stats somewhat moot. A guy who has won 14 GS knows how to pace & peak...however, he's lost some speed and mental edge...hence I have him at 25% chance.

Another interesting question is - if Djokovic gets knocked out early say, then who is fave, Murray or Rafa?

It just narrows the odds for all. Djoko is the favourite

I actually think that Andy would beat Rafa if they met, but would admit that some of the old Rafa might resurface in such a match

Henman Bill wrote:Also, your maths is wrong, you need to multiply the % not add them so that they compound and so your calculated chance of winning should be 75% rather than 73%. Doesn't make much difference here, so maybe a bit pedantic, but worth keeping in mind.

Yes you're right, I was in a rush and without a calculator so did it that way to get to an estimate.

I think your calculation assumes the worst for Djokovic on his opponents, someone may make a surprise run, and would be an easier opponent; see "Other" in my calculation. If you factor that in it would actually make his chances slightly better.

But if you include 'other', you have to take into account weighted average, so you can't just take an average of those 4 figures; e.g. the chance of 'other' in a Grand Slam final is not equivalent to the chance of Murray or Nadal.

Anyway enough of boring stats, in the next post I'll go through where we disagree i.e. the percentages of individual match ups.

Henman Bill wrote:For the early rounds. I'm saying Djokovic has a 1 in 50 chance of not progressing in each of the first few matches, you're saying it's 1 in 200.

I think frankly if Djokovic loses before the QF it would be most likely due to injury. As for the bookies odds, as you rightly said if he pulls out they make the bet void, but he could stay on anyway hindered and lose the match injured. Thus they're at risk of losing huge amounts if they make it 200/1.

I guess my calculations have been if he's fully fit, so if I say he has around 75% if fit, and then say he has 5% of chance of injury causing defeat or withdrawal, then it goes down to 70%, I'll concede that. But if he's fit, I'm happy with my figure of 1 in 200 for losing in the first 4 matches. It's clay, it's not faster like Wimbledon where big servers can take sets to a tiebreak easily and make the set depend on a few points. That is much harder to do at French Open, and with a great returner like Djokovic, I see it as very unlikely he gets beaten.

Henman Bill wrote:I did think of the weighted average but figured it wouldn't make much difference and I really do think "other" is as likely a final opponent as Murray or Nadal, especially when we factor in that Nadal could fall in his own half.

That's fair, I guess for this technical issue it would be better to wait for the draw to come out.

Henman Bill wrote:I could agree that Rafa might win only 10-20% of the time against Novak on all surfaces, but at a slam, where Rafa holds the mental edge, it's slow clay. These are factors. I'd give Rafa a higher % here.

Do you feel last year's victory over Nadal would have taken off the French Open aura Nadal has against Djokovic? I think Nadal has improved from last year, but that match was still very important for Djokovic to get through.

lydian wrote:But there is no way Murray is fave based on that surely...

Also, I don't really see the value of looking at Rafa's 2015 form...he fell off a cliff last year, everyone knows that - especially Novak.2016 Nadal is a completely different beast and you can see him visibly getting better by the tournament, rendering stats somewhat moot. A guy who has won 14 GS knows how to pace & peak...however, he's lost some speed and mental edge...hence I have him at 25% chance.

Another interesting question is - if Djokovic gets knocked out early say, then who is fave, Murray or Rafa?

It just narrows the odds for all. Djoko is the favourite

I actually think that Andy would beat Rafa if they met, but would admit that some of the old Rafa might resurface in such a match

LOL, love your delusion optimism

Yeah I know Murray has scored some recent three set success during Nadal's slump but I would not be favoring Murray in any head yo head. This year he is better and beating Nadal over five on clay is just a different animal than a three setter.if Nadal is playing well enough to reach Murray I think he wins that match and I hate to say it but he would probably win kind of easy.

On the matter of Murray's prospects for RG, I chanced upon an interesting set of stats somewhere in the tennis media recently (hope I'm not repeating something already covered here on 606 ..... I can't claim to have read every single post ....!)

It concerned Murray's past record against the other big boys - Federer/Nadal/Djokovic - and shows him to be significantly more successful, percentage-wise, when meeting them in Finals, as compared to earlier round matches.

Interesting numbers although you might expect that if Murray was once lower ranked so meeting them earlier and hence losing more? Nonetheless, it maybe shows that he can peak more for finals and there is no doubt his form is great going into RG this year so he's a definite contender for sure.

lydian wrote:Interesting numbers although you might expect that if Murray was once lower ranked so meeting them earlier and hence losing more? Nonetheless, it maybe shows that he can peak more for finals and there is no doubt his form is great going into RG this year so he's a definite contender for sure.

Pretty sure his W/L record prior to July 2008 (i.e. when he became a genuine contender) was fairly decent as he had something like a 3-1 lead against Roger at this time. He had been caned by Novak every time and also lost to Rafa, but his downfall has been numerous SF defeats to his rivals. i.e. the three consecutive slam loses in a row to Rafa in 2011!!

Re lags stats, 12-15 for Murray in finals v Djokovic/Nadal/Federer can't be covering slams as he is 2-7 in slams (all versus Djokovic or Federer). It could be right for all ATP finals including Masters. Not sure if Murray can take heart from those stats for the upcoming RG ....

I think 15 losses in finals is right. He's never lost to a non-big 4 player in either a slam or Masters final and he has lost 13 slam/Masters finals. That's 13 of the 15 losses. He has lost to Fed in the Dubai and Bangkok finals so that's 15. I don't think he has lost to either Rafa or Novak in a 250/500 final.

Wins are a bit trickier as I can't immediately recall who his Masters opponents were in each win but 12 sounds about right.

lydian wrote:Interesting numbers although you might expect that if Murray was once lower ranked so meeting them earlier and hence losing more? Nonetheless, it maybe shows that he can peak more for finals and there is no doubt his form is great going into RG this year so he's a definite contender for sure.

Pretty sure his W/L record prior to July 2008 (i.e. when he became a genuine contender) was fairly decent as he had something like a 3-1 lead against Roger at this time. He had been caned by Novak every time and also lost to Rafa, but his downfall has been numerous SF defeats to his rivals. i.e. the three consecutive slam loses in a row to Rafa in 2011!!

I think his record as at July 08 against Roger was 1-1. He was 0-9 against Novak/Rafa so 1-10 overall at that point. Only one of those was a final so at that point it would have been 0-1 (finals) and 1-9 (non-finals).